Odisha Gram Panchayat Act | Sarpanch Candidate Shouldn’t Have More Than Two Children Alive On Date Of Filing Nomination: High Court

The Orissa High Court has clarified that a candidate should not be having more than two children alive on the date of filing the nomination for the post of ‘Sarpanch’ under the Odisha Grama Panchayat Act, 1964.

Referring to Section 25(1)(v) of the Act, the Single Bench of Justice Bibhu Prasad Routray observed,

“From bare reading of the aforesaid clause, it is clear that the person contesting for the Office of Sarpanch should not have more than two children on the date of filing of nomination.”

The petitioner filed an election petition before Civil Judge (Junior Division), First Court, Cuttack challenging the election of the Opposite Party No.1 as Sarpanch on the ground that he was disqualified to contest the election for having more than two children.

The said Court had dismissed the petition observing that the Opposite Party No.1 had only two children alive on the date of filing nomination. Such order was later confirmed by the District Judge, Cuttack.

Getting no relief from the lower Courts, the petitioner took the shelter of the High Court, which noted that Opposite Party No.1 had three children. Among such children, one daughter died on 01.08.2008 and the election to the office of Sarpanch, Nakhara Gram Panchayat was held only in February, 2017.

The Court was of the considered opinion that the petition is misconceived on the facts and the provisions of law as one of the daughters namely died on 1.8.2008 and as such on the date of nomination to the Office of Sarpanch, Opposite Party No.1 had only two children.

The Court deemed it appropriate to have a look at the provision in clause (v) of sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Odisha Grama Panchayats Act, which says, “(v) a person shall be disqualified for being elected or nominated as, a Sarpanch or any other member of the Grama Panchayat constituted under this Acthas more than two children.”

“But in the instant case, since one of the children of Opposite Party No.1 was already dead from 2008, it is apparently clear that he did not have more than two children on the date of nomination, and has two children only,” the Court held.

Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed affirming the decisions reached by both the lower Courts.

Case Title: Sri Trailokyanath Swain v. Pabitra @ Pabitra Mohan Upadhaya & Anr.

Case No: W.P.(C) No. 3707 of 2023

Date of Judgment: October 13, 2023

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. S. Mishra, Advocate

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. D.P. Nanda, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. S. Lal, Advocate for O.P. No.1; Mr. Sonak Mishra, Addl. Standing Counsel

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ori) 110

Click Here To Read/Download Order